Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The case for spending more to ease voting in a pandemic

Vote by mail form

"Studies show mail-in ballots submitted by voters of color are rejected at higher rates than ballots from white voters. And all vote-by-mail systems may unintentionally leave vulnerable communities behind," writes Brettt Edkins.

Darylann Elmi/Getty Images

Edkins is political director of Stand Up America, a progressive advocacy and voter mobilization organization.

Our country has rarely faced a threat as dangerous as the coronavirus pandemic. Our economy is in freefall, millions are out of work, thousands are dying — and there is no clear end in sight. The decisions our leaders make now will determine whether we withstand this outbreak.

I am incredibly proud that during this crisis my fiancé, a physician in New York City, is working day and night treating Covid-19 patients. I can't do what he does. Instead, I'm working with advocates and activists to ensure that Americans don't have to sacrifice their health to exercise their right to vote this year.

But on Tuesday, that's exactly what happened in Wisconsin when Republican lawmakers forced hundreds of thousands to vote in-person despite the incredible risk. The chaos that unfolded during that primary cannot be permitted to happen again — and that's why Congress must swiftly intervene to provide states the resources they need to keep voters safe.


Our lawmakers need to make bold choices now, on many fronts, to give our country a fighting chance to get the best of this public health crisis. That means providing health care workers the protective equipment they need. That means helping tenants keep a roof over their heads. And that also means protecting our most fundamental American right: the right to vote.

At a White House news conference last week, President Trump rejected the idea that states should help millions of Americans vote by mail in November. But the United States has never administered a presidential election during a pandemic of this size — and states and localities will need resources they simply don't have right now.

Congressional Democrats estimate that $4 billion is needed to safeguard our elections during this crisis. The Brennan Center for Justice says at least $2 billion is required to expand vote-by-mail options and guarantee no-excuse absentee voting — and to print, deliver and track millions of additional ballots. Funding is also needed to clean and sanitize in-person polling places, pay poll workers more and train new ones, expand online voter registration and lengthen the time for early in-person voting to cut down on the risks posed by long lines and crowds at polling places.

Last month, thanks to pressure from activists and progressive lawmakers, Congress provided $400 million in election funding to the states. But that is just a fraction of what states need. The scale of this crisis demands a far more robust response, and Congress must pass additional funding now if we have any hope of protecting our elections before November.

If Congress can spend $2 trillion shoring up our economy, including $50 billion to bail out the airline industry, it can afford to invest $4 billion to secure our elections. Our democracy is worth that investment.

Ultimately, the states will have to implement the election reforms needed this November, and we cannot focus exclusively on mail-in voting. Studies show mail-in ballots submitted by voters of color are rejected at higher rates than ballots from white voters. And all vote-by-mail systems may unintentionally leave vulnerable communities behind.

Many Native Americans, especially those who live on reservations, do not have traditional street addresses. Voters with physical disabilities may have to vote in-person, as do many voters who need translation and language assistance to cast their ballot.

No one method is a solution on its own, and we cannot ask millions of voters to follow a one-size-fits-all approach. That's why states need adequate funding — to give voters options as to how they'll cast a ballot this year. We need expanded early voting, same-day voter registration, online voter registration, and other reforms to protect voters' rights and health.

It's also not enough to enact these reforms and just expect voters to take advantage of them. States must actively work to educate all voters about their options before November. The Brennan Center estimates that more than $250 million is needed for a public education campaign with "mailers, television, radio, social, and other media, all in multiple languages."

The truth is that we don't know how long this pandemic will last. But we do know we are running out of time to get the response right. Whether the president likes it or not, a record number of Americans will vote by mail in 2020. The only question is whether we are prepared. Failing to provide states with the resources they need puts the health of our democracy at risk.

Too much is at stake for lawmakers to go home without ensuring the safety of voters and poll workers during this election.

Read More

An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.
A pile of political buttons sitting on top of a table

Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.

Once again, politicians are trying to choose their voters to guarantee their own victories before the first ballot is cast.

In the latest round of redistricting wars, Texas Republicans are attempting a rare mid-decade redistricting to boost their advantage ahead of the 2026 midterms, and Democratic governors in California and New York are signaling they’re ready to “fight fire with fire” with their own partisan gerrymanders.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

Wilson Deschine sits at the "be my voice" voter registration stand at the Navajo Nation annual rodeo, in Window Rock.

Getty Images, David Howells

Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

On July 24, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a Circuit Court order in a far-reaching case that could affect the voting rights of all Americans. Native American tribes and individuals filed the case as part of their centuries-old fight for rights in their own land.

The underlying subject of the case confronts racial gerrymandering against America’s first inhabitants, where North Dakota’s 2021 redistricting reduced Native Americans’ chances of electing up to three state representatives to just one. The specific issue that the Supreme Court may consider, if it accepts hearing the case, is whether individuals and associations can seek justice under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). That is because the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, contradicting other courts, said that individuals do not have standing to bring Section 2 cases.

Keep ReadingShow less